Proposal To Abolish Seniority Draws Teachers' Ire in Mass.

One of the central tenets of unionism is under attack in
Massachusetts, where Gov. William F. Weld has proposed the abolition of
seniority as a factor in public-school employment.

If approved, the proposal would mark the first time any state has
required school districts to ignore years of service in deciding who
would be laid off during a time of economic downturn or dwindling
enrollment.

It also would purge the system of so-called "bumping rights," which
enable a veteran teacher or administrator to displace a more junior
one.

The seniority proposal, which is part of a broader education-reform
plan put forward by the Governor, is the second measure he has
recommended that would materially alter the relationship between
teachers and school officials. Mr. Weld has also called for discarding
tenure.

But while the state teachers' union has indicated a willingness to
compromise on the tenure issue, it has made clear its adamant
opposition to elimination of the seniority factor.

Leaders of the Massachusetts Teachers Association say the seniority
proposal has had a harmful impact on teacher morale at a time when
educators in the state are already trying to cope with devastating
budget cuts. Many teachers perceive the proposal as implying that they
must be ineffective just because they have been teaching for a number
of years, said Rosanne K. Bacon, the president of the M.T.A.

"I have never seen a politician, including the Governor, not put
forth [as a reason] to elect them their experience, and yet my
experience as a junior-high-school English teacher or a high-school
special-needs teacher is a detriment," Ms. Bacon observed.

"If there are people who are teaching in the classroom in
Massachusetts that ought not to be there, it isn't because of the union
and seniority," she added. "It's because they aren't being evaluated or
supervised properly."

Job Performance Stressed

Union leaders also contend that the proposal challenges an
employment practice that goes well beyond teaching or even unionism in
general.

"I don't know of any profession or workplace where how long you work
there doesn't count for something," said Keith Geiger, the president of
the National Education Association.

Analyzing the use of seniority by districts, the Weld administration
found that seniority is the "defining criterion" for layoffs, recalls,
and other employment decisions, according to Mafia Rodriguez, a
spokesman for the executive office of education.

The administration maintains that such a system does not advance
school reform. "The evaluation of job performance should be the most
important criterion for employment-related decisions," Ms. Rodriguez
said.

The proposal has, at least to a degree, the support of a key figure
in the debate, Representative Mark Roosevelt. Co-chairman of the
legislature's joint education committee, Mr. Roosevelt is one of the
architects of a major education-reform package expected to be
considered by lawmakers this year. (See Education Week, Dec. 11,
1991.)

Representative Roosevelt's plan calls for the recognition of
seniority as one factor in employment decisions, but not the primary
factor.

The Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents favors Mr.
Roosevelt's plan. "We do think there is some reason to establish some
equity based on abilities," said the group's executive director, Peter
R. Finn.

Mr. Finn added, however, that the Governor's proposal was
"extreme."

An Epidemic of Bumping?

In large part, the catalyst for the proposal has been the financial
plight of Massachusetts schools. As administrative and teaching
positions have been cut, many of those holding them have been able to
bump other certified-staff members.

Press reports have cited such examples as a physical-education
teacher displacing an award-winning mathematics teacher.

Lacking flexibility, administrators may be faced with placing a
teacher who "doesn't want to be there and isn't prepared to teach," Mr.
Finn said.

Union officials concede there have been a few such instances, but
said they have been rare. They point out that a senior teacher can bump
his or her way into a new position only if already certified to teach
that subject.

Ms. Bacon cited an example from her former school, where the second
ranking teacher was furloughed because he was certified to teach
business math but not regular math.

Countering claims that many teachers are moving into positions for
which they are unqualified, Ms. Bacon cited her own background as a
more plausible scenario. She is certified to teach secondary English
and social studies and K-12 special education. Before her stint as an
M.T.A. officer, she taught in special education for nine years. Prior
to that she taught 7th-grade English.

"I haven't lost my ability to handle 7th-grade English. I can still
teach the Civil War. I haven't lost my mind somewhere in the last nine
years," Ms. Bacon said, while acknowledging that it might take time
before she would be as good as the person who just left the post. Mr.
Geiger said that certain concessions on seniority might be made as long
as it is done within the collective-bargaining agreement.

In the early 1980's, the N.E.A. chief recalled, teacher locals in
Jackson and Lansing, Mich., incorporated affirmative-action language
into their contracts. Under the terms of the agreement, a specified
percentage of minority teachers would keep their jobs in the event of
layoffs even if that meant that some more senior teachers would lose
their jobs.

Last year in Boston, moreover, a federal judge ordered the school
district to base its layoff decisions on affirmative-action guidelines
rather than seniority. The Boston Teachers Union has opposed the idea,
however.

Given the precarious financial situation in Massachusetts, Ms. Bacon
said she is concerned that districts will use the measure to save money
by eliminating higher-paid teachers.

Even the most well-intentioned administrators will eventually
succumb to the pressure to save money by hiring less experienced, less
expensive teachers, she contended.

But other analysts say school officials are unlikely to take
advantage of the provision to the detriment of education quality.

"Most school administrators don't want to do foolish things," said
Crystal J. Gips, an associate professor of educational leadership at
Ohio University.

In all likelihood, Ms. Gips said, dropping seniority would not prove
harmful to teachers unless their other protections were eliminated.

Vol. 11, Issue 20, Pages 18, 20

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.